Wiki source code of Test
Version 61.1 by Veikko Saikkonen on 2022/04/01 14:49
Hide last authors
| author | version | line-number | content |
|---|---|---|---|
 |
2.1 | 1 | = Problem statement and research questions = |
 |
1.1 | 2 | |
| |
9.1 | 3 | People with dementia often forget to eat and drink, leading to dehydration, malnutrition and decreased wellbeing in general. Our prototype engages in discourses to remind PwD to have lunch and drink water, using the Nao robot platform. The discourse aims to reming the PwD without causing any anxiety or embarrassment which a traditional "alarm" system could cause, and keep them company throughout these activities. |
| |
1.1 | 4 | |
| |
60.1 | 5 | RQ1: "Does the robot cause PwD to eat more regularly?"* |
| |
61.1 | 6 | RQ2: "Does the robot remind the PwD of their hunger?" |
| 7 | RQ3: "Does the music make the eating more enjoyable for the PwD?" | ||
| 8 | RQ4: "Does the PwD experience less negative emotions, such as agitation, sadness, embarrassment, after the interaction with the 'intelligent' robot?" | ||
| |
3.1 | 9 | |
| |
60.1 | 10 | '*' This research question is difficult due to the practical limitations in designing the experimental setup and as such is left to lesser importance. |
| 11 | |||
| |
2.1 | 12 | = Method = |
| |
1.1 | 13 | |
| |
9.1 | 14 | The prototype is evaluated with an in-person experiment with multiple participants. In the experiment, the participants will be asked to pretend to be PwD and act accordingly with/without the prototype. |
| |
1.1 | 15 | |
| |
2.1 | 16 | == Participants == |
| |
1.1 | 17 | |
| |
9.1 | 18 | As there are practical difficulties with conducting the experiment with actual people with dementia due to both time constraints and COVID, our participants' group will consist of peers from other groups and friends, who will act as if they are older people with dementia. We plan to gather around 20 people for our experiments. |
| |
1.1 | 19 | |
| |
2.1 | 20 | == Experimental design == |
| |
1.1 | 21 | |
| |
9.1 | 22 | We will be using a within-subject design. In the experiment all of the participants will interact with both versions of the robot, with half of the participants interacting with the version 1 first and then version 2, and the other half in reverse order, to counter-balance the carryover effects. Snacks will be made available for the participants, in case they're prompted and they're hungry. The participants will be unaware of the possibility of eating snacks, to prevent disturbing the interaction with the robot. Otherwise the subjects could be primed for eating, which would bias the results and hide the effect of the robotic interaction. |
| |
1.1 | 23 | |
| |
2.1 | 24 | == Tasks == |
| |
1.1 | 25 | |
| |
9.1 | 26 | The participant will have to interact with the robot, which is programmed to engage in a lunch discourse. Two versions will be implemented: the first version will ask basic questions about mealtime, mostly acting as a reminder for the PwD to have lunch (alarm clock). The second will be our original implementation of it with the more sophisticated discourse and music. |
| |
1.1 | 27 | |
| |
2.1 | 28 | == Measures == |
| |
1.1 | 29 | |
| |
9.1 | 30 | We plan on measuring the effectiveness of the discourse, both physically and emotionally. Our quantitative measure is whether the person ate the lunch they were supposed to have eaten, and the qualitative measure is the emotions that the PwD experienced before, during, and after the interaction. The qualitative measures will be recorded with a simple questionnaire. Depending on the time of the experiments, we assume that people might also not be hungry enough to be prompted to have something to eat, which might disturb the results. We do plan however to measure whether the robot will remind someone of their hunger and have them eat. |
| |
1.1 | 31 | |
| |
2.1 | 32 | == Procedure == |
| |
1.1 | 33 | |
| |
4.1 | 34 | * Welcome Participants and explain what they are going to be doing. |
| 35 | * Have them sign the permission form. | ||
| 36 | * Participants complete a questionnaire(A) regarding their emotional state (control). | ||
| 37 | * Have version A of interaction with the robot. | ||
| 38 | * Complete questionnaire(extended version). | ||
| 39 | * Have a short interview during downtime (prepared questions). | ||
| 40 | * Have version B of interaction with the robot. | ||
| 41 | * Complete questionnaire(extended version). | ||
| 42 | * Have a short interview during downtime (prepared questions). | ||
| |
1.1 | 43 | |
| |
2.1 | 44 | == Material == |
| |
1.1 | 45 | |
| |
9.1 | 46 | For the experiments, we'll be using the NAO robot platform, as well as a laptop for the participants to complete the questionnaires on. The questionnaire will be a combination of questions regarding the emotional state of the participants, their interaction with the robot, and the music included in the interaction. Food will be made available to see and measure how much people will eat. |
| |
1.1 | 47 | |
| |
20.1 | 48 | Questionnaires: |
| 49 | Consent Form and Disclaimers | ||
| 50 | 8 questions from the [[EVEA>>https://www.ucm.es/data/cont/docs/39-2013-04-19-EVEA%20-%20Datasheet.pdf]] questionnaire | ||
| 51 | 4 questions from the [[Godspeed>>https://www.bartneck.de/2008/03/11/the-godspeed-questionnaire-series/]] questionnaire | ||
| 52 | 3 food-related questions of our own (5-point Likert scale) | ||
| 53 | 2 music-related questions of our own (5-point Likert scale) | ||
| 54 | |||
| |
11.1 | 55 | == Practicalities == |
| |
1.1 | 56 | |
| |
11.1 | 57 | Beforehand: |
| |
17.1 | 58 | |
| |
11.1 | 59 | * Do a practice round by ourselves |
| 60 | ** Film this | ||
| 61 | * Contact other groups and decide on a time slot | ||
| 62 | ** Might be better to reserve in 10 min slots, so that people don't have to wait so much | ||
| 63 | ** If possible, this could be done in parallel with another groups testing | ||
| 64 | * Reserve lab | ||
| 65 | * Buy snacks | ||
| 66 | |||
| 67 | During: | ||
| |
17.1 | 68 | |
| |
11.1 | 69 | 1. Give starting questionnare to fill while people are waiting for the previous participant |
| 70 | 2. Guide the participant to the testing spot | ||
| 71 | 3. Inform the participant where the snacks are | ||
| 72 | 4. Run the first version | ||
| 73 | 5. Give the mid-questionnare | ||
| 74 | 6. Run the other test | ||
| |
13.1 | 75 | 7. Conduct the questionnare for the participant |
| 76 | 8. Give the participant the end-questionnare | ||
| |
11.1 | 77 | |
| |
17.1 | 78 | Other practicalities during: |
| |
11.1 | 79 | |
| 80 | * We will use the "Wizard of Oz" method for recognizing agreement and disagreement, to make sure that the whole process does not depend on voice recegnition being good enough | ||
| 81 | ** Someone will press eg. "y" and "n" on the keyboard according to the participants answers | ||
| 82 | * We will change the order in which the smart and basic versions are for each participant | ||
| 83 | ** this way if someone doesn't show up, we don't get skewed amounts | ||
| 84 | |||
| 85 | After: | ||
| |
17.1 | 86 | |
| |
11.1 | 87 | * Analyze results |
| 88 | |||
| |
35.1 | 89 | = Results = |
| |
1.1 | 90 | |
| |
58.1 | 91 | The results were gathered from 19 personnel, all of whom interacted first with one version of the robot and then the other. 10 of the participants interacted first with the simple version, nine having their first interaction with the advanced version. |
| 92 | |||
| |
41.1 | 93 | == Eating == |
| 94 | |||
| 95 | {{html}} | ||
| |
44.1 | 96 | <img src="https://xwiki.ewi.tudelft.nl/xwiki/wiki/sce2022group01/download/Test/WebHome/EatingComp.png?rev=1.1" alt="Results on the eating of the test personas" style="display:block;margin-left:auto;margin-right:auto" width=750/> |
| |
41.1 | 97 | {{/html}} |
| 98 | |||
| 99 | (% style="text-align:center" %) | ||
| 100 | Figure: Results on the eating of the test personas during the experiment | ||
| 101 | |||
| |
59.1 | 102 | |=Version|=Did not eat|=Ate|=Would not have eaten without the robot|\\ |
| 103 | |Simple|16|3|1 | ||
| 104 | |Advanced|13|6|4 | ||
| 105 | |||
| 106 | Simple robot: | ||
| 107 | |||
| 108 | * 16% ate | ||
| 109 | * 33% of those would not have eaten without the robot | ||
| 110 | |||
| 111 | Advanced robot: | ||
| 112 | |||
| 113 | * 32% ate | ||
| 114 | * 67% of those would not have eaten without the robot | ||
| 115 | |||
| |
51.1 | 116 | == EVEA (Mood) == |
| |
29.1 | 117 | |
| 118 | {{html}} | ||
| |
45.1 | 119 | <img src="https://xwiki.ewi.tudelft.nl/xwiki/wiki/sce2022group01/download/Test/WebHome/MoodChangeDumb.png?rev=1.1" alt="Measured moods and changes for the simple robot" style="display:block;margin-left:auto;margin-right:auto" width=750/> |
| |
29.1 | 120 | {{/html}} |
| 121 | |||
| |
32.2 | 122 | (% style="text-align:center" %) |
| |
30.1 | 123 | Figure: Median measured moods for the simple version of the robot |
| 124 | |||
| |
32.2 | 125 | {{html}} |
| |
45.1 | 126 | <img src="https://xwiki.ewi.tudelft.nl/xwiki/wiki/sce2022group01/download/Test/WebHome/MoodChangeSmart.png?rev=1.1" alt="Measured moods and changes for the advanced version of the robot" style="display:block;margin-left:auto;margin-right:auto" width=750/> |
| |
32.2 | 127 | {{/html}} |
| 128 | |||
| 129 | (% style="text-align:center" %) | ||
| |
30.1 | 130 | Figure: Median measured moods for the advanced version of the robot |
| |
29.1 | 131 | |
| |
33.1 | 132 | (% style="text-align:center" %) |
| |
48.1 | 133 | Table: Wilcoxon signed rank test results for the hypothesis that the mood changed during the interaction with the simple robot |
| |
37.1 | 134 | |
| 135 | |=Mood|=Happiness|=Anxiety|=Sadness|=Anger | ||
| 136 | |Statistic|37|5|4|14 | ||
| 137 | |P-value|0.54|0.01|0.01|0.45 | ||
| 138 | |||
| 139 | (% style="text-align:center" %) | ||
| |
48.1 | 140 | Table: Wilcoxon signed rank test results for the null hypothesis that the mood changed during the interaction with the advanced robot |
| |
37.1 | 141 | |
| 142 | |=Mood|=Happiness|=Anxiety|=Sadness|=Anger | ||
| |
49.1 | 143 | |Statistic|32|11|2|17 |
| 144 | |P-value|0.18|0.01|0.01|0.45 | ||
| |
37.1 | 145 | |
| 146 | (% style="text-align:center" %) | ||
| |
48.1 | 147 | Table: Wilcoxon signed rank test results for the null hypothesis that the mood decreased during the interaction with the simple robot |
| |
33.1 | 148 | |
| |
35.1 | 149 | |=Mood|=Anxiety|=Sadness|=Anger |
| 150 | |Statistic|81|53|29 | ||
| |
38.1 | 151 | |P-value|0.01|0.00|0.23 |
| |
33.1 | 152 | |
| |
34.1 | 153 | (% style="text-align:center" %) |
| |
48.1 | 154 | Table: Wilcoxon signed rank test results for the null hypothesis that the mood decreased during the interaction with the advanced robot |
| |
33.1 | 155 | |
| |
35.1 | 156 | |=Mood|=Anxiety|=Sadness|=Anger |
| |
36.1 | 157 | |Statistic|32|149|52 |
| |
38.1 | 158 | |P-value|0.00|0.01|0.07 |
| |
34.1 | 159 | |
| |
35.1 | 160 | (% style="text-align:center" %) |
| |
48.1 | 161 | Table: Wilcoxon signed rank test results for the null hypothesis that the mood increased during the interaction with the simple robot |
| |
34.1 | 162 | |
| |
35.1 | 163 | |=Mood|=Happiness |
| 164 | |Statistic|37 | ||
| |
38.1 | 165 | |P-value|0.27 |
| |
35.1 | 166 | |
| 167 | (% style="text-align:center" %) | ||
| |
48.1 | 168 | Table: Wilcoxon signed rank test results for the null hypothesis that the mood increased during the interaction with the advanced robot |
| |
35.1 | 169 | |
| 170 | |=Mood|=Happiness | ||
| 171 | |Statistic|32 | ||
| |
38.1 | 172 | |P-value|0.09 |
| |
35.1 | 173 | |
| |
39.1 | 174 | == Music == |
| 175 | |||
| 176 | {{html}} | ||
| |
47.1 | 177 | <img src="https://xwiki.ewi.tudelft.nl/xwiki/wiki/sce2022group01/download/Test/WebHome/MusicEnjoyable.png?rev=1.1" alt="Effects of music on the test personnel" style="display:block;margin-left:auto;margin-right:auto" width=1250/> |
| |
39.1 | 178 | {{/html}} |
| 179 | |||
| 180 | (% style="text-align:center" %) | ||
| 181 | Figure: Answers of the test personas regarding music | ||
| 182 | |||
| |
52.1 | 183 | == Godspeed == |
| 184 | |||
| |
40.1 | 185 | {{html}} |
| |
46.1 | 186 | <img src="https://xwiki.ewi.tudelft.nl/xwiki/wiki/sce2022group01/download/Test/WebHome/friendly-hist.png?rev=1.1" alt="Effects of music on the test personnel" style="display:block;margin-left:auto;margin-right:auto" width=750/> |
| |
41.1 | 187 | {{/html}} |
| |
40.1 | 188 | |
| |
41.1 | 189 | (% style="text-align:center" %) |
| 190 | Figure: Answers to the statement 'I thought the robot was friendly' | ||
| 191 | |||
| |
40.1 | 192 | {{html}} |
| |
46.1 | 193 | <img src="https://xwiki.ewi.tudelft.nl/xwiki/wiki/sce2022group01/download/Test/WebHome/pleasant-hist.png?rev=1.1" alt="Answers to the statement 'I thought the robot was pleasant'." style="display:block;margin-left:auto;margin-right:auto" width=750/> |
| |
40.1 | 194 | {{/html}} |
| 195 | |||
| 196 | (% style="text-align:center" %) | ||
| |
41.1 | 197 | Figure: Answers to the statement 'I thought the robot was pleasant' |
| |
40.1 | 198 | |
| |
54.1 | 199 | {{html}} |
| 200 | <img src="https://xwiki.ewi.tudelft.nl/xwiki/wiki/sce2022group01/download/Test/WebHome/godspeed-barchart.png?rev=1.1" alt="Godspeed questionnaire median comparison'." style="display:block;margin-left:auto;margin-right:auto" width=750/> | ||
| 201 | {{/html}} | ||
| |
1.1 | 202 | |
| |
54.1 | 203 | (% style="text-align:center" %) |
| 204 | Figure: Median measured Godspeed questionnaire dimensions | ||
| |
41.1 | 205 | |
| |
56.1 | 206 | |=Dimension|=Likeability|=Intelligence |
| |
55.1 | 207 | |Statistic|36|70 |
| 208 | |P-value|0.01|0.17 | ||
| |
52.1 | 209 | |
| |
55.1 | 210 | (% style="text-align:center" %) |
| 211 | Table: Wilcoxon signed rank test results for the null hypothesis that the advanced robot scored higher in the perceived dimensions | ||
| |
52.1 | 212 | |
| |
57.1 | 213 | = Conclusions = |
| |
54.1 | 214 | |
| |
57.1 | 215 | From the results we can see that the more advanced robot |
| |
54.1 | 216 | |
| |
55.1 | 217 | |
| |
2.1 | 218 | = Discussion = |
| |
1.1 | 219 | |
| 220 | |||
| 221 | |||
| |
10.1 | 222 | = Appendix = |
| 223 | |||
| |
17.1 | 224 | == Experiment introduction for participants == |
| |
16.1 | 225 | |
| |
17.1 | 226 | |
| |
16.1 | 227 | |
| |
17.1 | 228 | Hi, we are <NAME> and <NAME> from the TU Delft Socio-Cognitive Engeering course Group 1, thank you for participating in our prototype evaluation experiment. The experiment is being conducted as a part of the TU Delft course on Socio-Cognitive Engineering and aims to evaluate the prototype designed as a part of the course. The evaluated prototype is based on the Nao robot-platform and is intended to improve the wellbeing of people suffering of dementia. |
| |
16.1 | 229 | |
| |
19.1 | 230 | Consuming food and/or water can be a consequence of the interaction between you and the robot. Therefore, we would like to ask you if you have any allergies. If you have a form of Diabetes, please let us know before we start the first part of the experiment. You are strongly encouraged to share any other health conditions that can possibly be relevant to take into account when doing an experiment with robots and food with us. |
| 231 | |||
| 232 | The link between the stimuli of the Nao-robot and the triggering of epileptic seizures is yet unknown. If you have ever experienced epileptic seizures, please let us know. Then, we could see if any special precautions are needed. | ||
| 233 | |||
| |
18.1 | 234 | The experiment will last for approximately 15-20 minutes, and consists of two interaction sections with the Nao robot, as well as questionnaires before, between and after the sections. We kindly ask you to act naturally during the experiment and fill the questionnaires truthfully and intuitively. Remember that we are evaluating the prototypes performance, not yours. You can stop the experiment at any time. |
| |
17.1 | 235 | |
| 236 | We will be collecting data of the questionnaires and recording some experiments, do you agree with your experiment being recorded? All data excluding the recordings will be anonymised before analysis and storage. The recordings will not be shared with third parties. After the experiment you have the right to ask for information about the collected data and revoke the right to use it. We kindly ask you not to share any information about the experiment with other participants. | ||
| |
16.1 | 237 | Do you have any questions? |
| 238 | |||
| |
10.1 | 239 | == After research interview == |
| 240 | |||
| 241 | Setup: | ||
| 242 | The test subject has finished both parts of the experiment. Before leaving the test conductor(s) sit down with them and ask the following questions in a discussion about the experiment. Discussion can flow freely, but the following topics should be discussed. | ||
| 243 | |||
| 244 | Topics: | ||
| 245 | - Emotions before / during / after the interaction with the robot | ||
| 246 | - Agitation due to the robot suggesting eating | ||
| 247 | - Effect of music on the general feeling of the situation | ||
| 248 | - Feeling of company during eating | ||
| 249 | - Effectiveness of eating/drinking suggestions | ||
| 250 | |||
| |
12.1 | 251 | Questions: |
| 252 | - Did you eat or drink anything during the experiment? | ||
| 253 | - Were you feeling hungry/thirsty beforehand and did the discourse change this? | ||
| 254 | - On a scale of 1-10, how likely would you have eaten/drank without the robot suggesting it? | ||
| |
10.1 | 255 | - What did the interaction with the robot feel like? |
| 256 | - With the more intelligent version? | ||
| 257 | - With the less intelligent version? | ||
| 258 | - What did you feel like when the robot suggested you should eat/drink? |